User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
tests:sphtri

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
tests:sphtri [2015/09/01 17:01] – justintests:sphtri [2022/10/24 12:10] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
Line 8: Line 8:
 **Key working group coordinator:** Justin Read  **Key working group coordinator:** Justin Read 
  
 +**Summary of 2015 Gaia Challenge:** {{:tests:summary_sphericaltriaxial.pdf|Summary GCIII}}
 ---- ----
  
Line 23: Line 24:
   * [[:tests:sphtri:triaxial|Triaxial models]]   * [[:tests:sphtri:triaxial|Triaxial models]]
   * [[:tests:sphtri:tidal|Tidally stripped models]]   * [[:tests:sphtri:tidal|Tidally stripped models]]
 +  * [[:tests:sphtri:axion|Axion DM model]]
 +====== Priority order of runs ======
 +
 +We realise that the above mocks about to a very large number of tests which for some methods may be prohibitive. For this reason, if you can only run some of the tests the priority order is as follows:
 +
 +  * Spherical isotropic models viewed along z with velocity errors and 10,000 stars.
 +  * Spherical radially anisotropic models viewed along z with velocity errors and 10,000 stars. 
 +  * Spherical tangentially anisotropic models viewed along z with velocity errors and 10,000 stars.
 +  * The above with lower sampling (1000 stars; 100 stars). You may prefer to do the sampling tests just for one system in which case start with the isotropic models, as above.
 +  * Split component models (if your method is capable of this; again with velocity error). 
 +  * Triaxial models with velocity error and 10,000 star sampling. Try projections along X (long axis); and the intermediate axis I.
 +  * Tidally stripped models with velocity error and 10,000 star sampling.
 +
 +In all cases **projections should be along the z-axis**.
  
 ===== The default outputs ===== ===== The default outputs =====
Line 30: Line 45:
   * <latex>$d\ln\rho/d\ln r$</latex> (with confidence intervals as above)   * <latex>$d\ln\rho/d\ln r$</latex> (with confidence intervals as above)
   * Anisotropy profile (with confidence intervals as above); <latex>$\beta(r) = 1 -  \sigma_\theta^2/\sigma_r^2$</latex>   * Anisotropy profile (with confidence intervals as above); <latex>$\beta(r) = 1 -  \sigma_\theta^2/\sigma_r^2$</latex>
-  * Projected light number density profile with conf. intervals (+data overlay) +  * Projected light number density profile with conf. intervals 
-  * Projected velocity dispersion profile with conf. intervals (+data overlay)+  * 3D light density profile with conf. intervals  
 +  * Projected velocity dispersion profile with conf. intervals
   * **Please output over the largest radial range feasible for your chosen technique**   * **Please output over the largest radial range feasible for your chosen technique**
  
Line 38: Line 54:
 File format: ASCII columnated (headings allowed). Example: File format: ASCII columnated (headings allowed). Example:
  
-^ Height (kpc) ^ Cumulative mass (Msun) [45.7% low] ^ 34% low ^ Median ^ 34% high ^ 47.5% high ^ +^ Projected/or 3D radius (kpc) ^ Cumulative mass (Msun) [2.3% low] ^ [15.9% low] ^ Median [50%] ^ [84.1% high] ^ [97.7% high] ^ 
-| 0.2 | 1e4 | 5e4 | 10e4 | 15e4 | 20e4 |+| 0.2 | 1e3 | 1e4 | 1e5 | 1e6 | 1e10 |
  
 ---- ----
Line 55: Line 71:
 Results from running the above using a variety of techniques can be found [[:tests:sphtri:results|here]]. Results from running the above using a variety of techniques can be found [[:tests:sphtri:results|here]].
  
 +===== Discussion ======
 +
 +**Gary**
 +
 +//Questions on outputs//
 +
 +  * Accuracy of outputs (say 3 digits or more after the decimal point. The poor accuracy of the example is misleading).
 +  * Methods ought to provide important numbers as well as profiles:
 +  *   * inner DM slope
 +  *   * inner stellar slope
 +  *   * half-projeted-mass radius <latex>$R_{1/2}$</latex> (<latex>$R_{\rm eff}$</latex> in ellitpical galaxy parlance) and uncertainty (although one could numerically estimate it by fitting <latex>$\nu(r)$</latex> and projecting).
 +  * Should we provide maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) values of the profiles as well? This seems relevant for the DM density profiles of <latex>$\gamma_{\rm DM}$</latex> (core DM) models, for which the median slope is not 0, but the MLE slope is.
 +  * Could add <latex>$J_{\rm LOS}$</latex> and <latex>$J_{\rm ap}$</latex> (line-of-sight and aperture terms for the γ-ray emission from DM annihilation).
 +
 +//Questions on comparisons of methods//
 +
 +  * Do we wish to make quantitative comparisons between methods, or simply compare them graphically?
 +  * If we wish to make quantitative comparisons, which measures shall we use? 
 +  *   * Bias and scatter at specific radii such as <latex>$R_{\rm eff}^{\rm true}$</latex>?
 +  *   * RMS difference with true profile between some radii (in linear or logarithmic bins?)?
 +
 +//Other questions//
  
 +Can we still bring in new methods to this 3rd GAIA Challenge?
tests/sphtri.1441126902.txt.gz · Last modified: 2022/10/24 12:10 (external edit)